The following podcast contains advertising.

To access an ad-free version of the LawFair podcast,

become a material supporter of LawFair at patreon.com slash law fair.

That's patreon.com slash law fair.

Also, check out LawFair's other podcast offerings,

rational security, chatter, law fair no bull, and the aftermath.

What fascinates me in all this, in this most unusual confirmation process,

is I'm beginning to wonder whether Gina Haspel even wanted to be nominated as director of CIA.

We've already discussed how she never could have imagined or expected that she would be in this position.

We know that last Friday, as the tensions grew within the White House over her chances of being confirmed

in some White House officials began to get very nervous about those chances that Gina Haspel took the extraordinary step of offering to withdraw her nomination.

Basically saying, I'm out enough.

And we understand that she did that because she did not want this public drama to grow even bigger and potentially damage the CIA

and damage her own reputation.

I'm Benjamin Widis, and this is the LawFair podcast May 8, 2018.

Gina Haspel goes before the Senate Intelligence Committee tomorrow for confirmation as the CIA's director.

It's gonna be Harry.

Haspel, the CIA's current deputy director, was deeply involved in the CIA's coercive interrogation program in the years that followed 9-11.

She also has an extremely distinguished career as a case officer in a wide variety of areas.

Shane Harris of the Washington Post recently produced a lengthy and detailed profile of Haspel.

He joined me this morning to discuss the nomination, the cases for and against her, and what we can expect when she faces the committee tomorrow.

It's the LawFair podcast, episode 308.

...